Disappearing defendants versus judgment-proof injurers

Authors
Publication date 2008
Journal Economica
Volume | Issue number 75 | 300
Pages (from-to) 749-765
Organisations
  • Interfacultary Research - Amsterdam Center for Law & Economics (ACLE)
  • Faculty of Economics and Business (FEB) - Amsterdam Business School Research Institute (ABS-RI)
Abstract
In this paper we analyse two ways in which liability can be reduced: caps (the judgment proof problem), and proportional reductions (the disappearing defendant problem). We show that these two problems have different incentive effects and hence yield dissimilar levels of social welfare. Moreover, when they occur simultaneously they may have offsetting effects. We also show that the negligence rule with cause-in-fact may yield lower (rather than higher) levels of social welfare than strict liability. Finally, we analyse the optimal setting of the negligence standard. Our model encompasses different precaution technologies as well as monetary v. non-monetary precautions.
Document type Article
Published at https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0335.2007.00663.x
Permalink to this page
Back